Can a peri-rectal hydrogel spaceOAR programme for prostate cancer intensity-modulated radiotherapy be successfully implemented in a regional setting?

Patient Reported Quality of Life Outcomes After Definitive Radiation Therapy With Absorbable Spacer Hydrogel for Prostate Cancer

Purpose

SpaceOAR is a device approved for conventional radiation in prostate cancer. We sought to observe prospectively how SpaceOAR Hydrogel effected quality of life and dosimetry to organs at risk at our institution.

Methods and Materials

We prospectively enrolled patients with low risk or favorable-intermediate risk localized prostate cancer. Baseline Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC-26) scores along with baseline American Urology Association Symptom Index (AUA-SI) scores were collected. SpaceOAR was placed for all patients who then received stereotactic body radiation therapy, low dose rate brachytherapy, conventionally fractionated radiation therapy, or moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy. We evaluated postimplant dosimetry to critical structures, and prospectively collected follow-up EPIC-26 and AUA-SI scores. We performed a repeated measures analysis of variance to compare patient-specific responses and correlated survey data with dosimetric metrics by generating linear regression models.

Results

We enrolled 59 patients in this study with a median follow-up of 366 days (interquartile range, 507). At final follow-up, the "?>prostate-specific antigen had a significant decline compared with baseline (P < .0001). There were no grade 3 toxicities on treatment. There were no significant changes in the AUA-SI score (P = .69) at final follow-up compared with baseline, nor was there any change in EPIC-26 domain scores (P = .19) during the course of the study period. There were no significant associations between AUA scores and EPIC-26 scores and the dose to the rectum, bladder, or urethra with the exception being dose to the 2 mL rectum correlated with decline in EPIC-26 rectal score (β, −0.002; P = .006). Patient-reported declines in bowel domains were less than previously reported data.

Conclusions

Use of SpaceOAR results in favorable dosimetry to the organs at risk and portends excellent short-term quality of life as measured by the association with the patient reported outcome measures. Longer-term follow-up is ongoing and necessary to assess the long-term effect and association of the hydrogel.

EUS-guided hydrogel microparticle injection in a cadaveric model

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A potential method to reduce gastrointestinal toxicity during radiation therapy in pancreatic head cancer is to create a physical space between the head of the pancreas (HOP) and the duodenum. To date, there have been early reports on the feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hydrogel injection into the interface between the HOP and the duodenum to increase the peri-pancreatic space for radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility of EUS-guided hydrogel injection for the creation of space at the peri-pancreatic interface in a cadaveric model.

METHODS

Baseline abdominal computerized tomography (CT) was performed on three unfixed cadaveric specimens. The hydrogel was injected transduodenally into the interface between the HOP and duodenum using linear-array EUS and a 19G needle for fine needle aspiration (FNA). This procedure was repeated along the length of the HOP. CT imaging and gross dissection were performed after the procedure to confirm the localization of the hydrogel and to measure the distance between the HOP and the duodenum.

RESULTS

All cadavers underwent successful EUS-guided injection of the hydrogel. Cadavers 1, 2, and 3 were injected with 9.5, 27, and 10 cc of hydrogel, respectively; along the HOP, the formation of the peri-pancreatic space was a maximum size of 11.77, 13.20, and 12.89 mm, respectively. The hydrogel injections were clearly visualized as hyperechoic bullae during EUS and on post-procedure CT images without any artifacts in all cases.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated that EUS-guided delivery of hydrogel is feasible, and that it increases the peri-pancreatic space in a cadaveric model. The polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel was clearly visible on EUS and CT, without significant artifacts. This may lead to new treatment approaches for pancreatic carcinomas.

Dosimetric and clinical outcomes of SpaceOAR in men undergoing external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review

SpaceOAR, an absorbable polyethylene glycol hydrogel, increases the space between the prostate and rectum to reduce the radiation received by the rectum during prostate cancer radiation therapy. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate controlled studies on the dosimetric and clinical outcomes of SpaceOAR in men undergoing external beam radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Eight studies were included in the review. All of the studies showed SpaceOAR to reduce the radiation dose volume to the rectum over numerous dosimetry levels. Of the four studies that assessed toxicity, one reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease acute Grade 1 diarrhoea and two reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease late Grade 1 and Grade ≥2 rectal toxicities. Two studies assessed cumulative incidence of toxicity at 3 years in which one reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease urinary incontinence and Grade ≥1 and Grade ≥2 rectal toxicities, and the other reported SpaceOAR to significantly decrease Grade 1 diarrhoea and Grade 2 proctitis. Moreover, one study reported that fewer SpaceOAR patients experienced 10-point declines in bowel quality of life at 3 years, but another study reported no significant difference in 10-point declines in bowel quality of life between the SpaceOAR and control groups at 5 years. With the current research available, SpaceOAR may be beneficial to those who did not meet the standard rectal dose-volume criteria, have higher risk factors of developing rectal toxicities post-radiation, or wish to decrease the length and costs of radiotherapy by increasing the dose of radiation per fraction.

Association of the Placement of a Perirectal Hydrogel Spacer With the Clinical Outcomes of Men Receiving Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Importance

Perirectal spacers are intended to lower the risk of rectal toxic effects associated with prostate radiotherapy. A quantitative synthesis of typical clinical results with specific perirectal spacers is limited.

Objective

To evaluate the association between perirectal hydrogel spacer placement and clinical outcomes of men receiving radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Data Sources

A systematic search was performed of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for articles published through September 2019.

Study Selection

Studies comparing men who received a hydrogel spacer vs men who did not receive a spacer (controls) prior to prostate radiotherapy.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Via random-effects meta-analysis, group comparisons were reported using the weighted mean difference for continuous measures and the risk ratio for binary measures.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Procedural results, the percentage volume of rectum receiving at least 70 Gy radiation (v70), early (≤3 months) and late (>3 months) rectal toxic effects, and early and late changes in bowel-related quality of life on the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (minimal clinically important difference, 4 points).

Results

The review included 7 studies (1 randomized clinical trial and 6 cohort studies) involving 1011 men (486 who received a hydrogel spacer and 525 controls), with a median duration of patient follow-up of 26 months (range, 3-63 months). The success rate of hydrogel spacer placement was 97.0% (95% CI, 94.4%-98.8% [5 studies]), and the weighted mean perirectal separation distance was 11.2 mm (95% CI, 10.1-12.3 mm [5 studies]). Procedural complications were mild and transient, occurring in 0% to 10% of patients within the studies. The hydrogel spacer group received 66% less v70 rectal irradiation compared with controls (3.5% vs 10.4%; mean difference, -6.5%; 95% CI, -10.5% to -2.5%; P = .001 [6 studies]). The risk of grade 2 or higher rectal toxic effects was comparable between groups in early follow-up (4.5% in hydrogel spacer group vs 4.1% in control group; risk ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.52-1.28; P = .38 [6 studies]) but was 77% lower in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (1.5% vs 5.7%; risk ratio, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.99; P = .05 [4 studies]). Changes in bowel-related quality of life were comparable between groups in early follow-up (mean difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -3.1 to 3.4; P = .92 [2 studies]) but were greater in the hydrogel spacer group in late follow-up (mean difference, 5.4; 95% CI, 2.8-8.0; P < .001 [2 studies]).

Conclusions and Relevance

For men receiving prostate radiotherapy, injection of a hydrogel spacer was safe, provided prostate-rectum separation sufficient to reduce v70 rectal irradiation, and was associated with fewer rectal toxic effects and higher bowel-related quality of life in late follow-up.

SpaceOAR© hydrogel rectal dose reduction prediction model: a decision support tool

Prostate cancer external beam radiation therapy can result in toxicity due to organ at risk (OAR) dose, potentially impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol-based spacer, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted between prostate gland and rectum may significantly reduce dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. SOH implant is not equally effective in all patients. Determining patients in which the implant will offer most benefit, in terms of rectal dose reduction, allows for effective management of SOH resources. Several factors have been shown to be correlated with reduction in rectal dose including distance between rectum and planning treatment volume (PTV), volume of rectum in the PTV, and change in rectum volume pre- to post-SOH. Several of these factors along with other pre-SOH CT metrics were able to predict reduction in rectal dose associated with SOH implant. Rectal V55Gy metric, was selected as the dose level of interest in the context of 60 Gy in 20 fraction treatment plans. Models were produced to predict change in RV55Gy and pre-SOH hydrogel RV55Gy. These models offered R-squared between 0.81 and 0.88 with statistical significance in each model. Applying an ω 1  = 3% lower limit of pre-SOH RV55 Gy and an ω 2  = 3.5% lower limit on change in RV55 Gy, retained 60% of patients experiencing the largest rectal dose reduction from the hydrogel. This may offer a clinically useful tool in deciding which patients should receive SOH implant given limited resources. Predictive models, nomograms, and a workflow diagram were produced for clinical management of SOH implant.

Choosing between conventional and hypofractionated prostate cancer radiation therapy: Results from a study of shared decision-making

AIM

To evaluate patient choice of prostate cancer radiotherapy fractionation, using a decision aid.

BACKGROUND

Recent ASTRO guidelines recommend patients with localised prostate cancer be offered moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy after discussing increased acute toxicity and uncertainty of long-term results compared to conventional fractionation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision aid was designed to outline the benefits and potential downsides of conventionally and moderately hypofractionated radiation therapy. The aid incorporated the ASTRO guideline to outline risks and benefits.

RESULTS

In all, 124 patients with localised prostate cancer were seen from June-December 2018. Median age was 72 (range 50-90), 49.6 % were intermediate risk (50.4 % high risk). All except three patients made a choice using the aid; the three undecided patients were hypofractionated. In all, 33.9 % of patients chose hypofractionation: falling to 25.3 % for patients under 75 years, 24.3 % for patients living within 30 miles of the cancer centre, and 14.3 % for patients with baseline gastrointestinal symptoms. On multivariate analysis, younger age, proximity to the centre, and having baseline gastrointestinal symptoms significantly predicted for choosing conventional fractionation. Insurance status, attending clinician, baseline genitourinary symptoms, work/carer status, ECOG, cancer risk group and driving status did not impact choice. Reasons for choosing conventional fractionation were certainty of long-term results (84 %) and lower acute bowel toxicity (51 %).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients declined the convenience of moderate hypofractionation due to potentially increased acute toxicity, and the uncertainty of long-term outcomes. We advocate that no patient should be offered hypofractionation without a thorough discussion of uncertainty and acute toxicity.

What is the quality of hydrogel spacer insertions? and which patients will benefit? A literature review

Aim:

To evaluate the quality of rectal hydrogel spacer (HS) insertions from literature in patients undergoing radical radiotherapy for prostate cancer. The secondary aim is to assess the benefit of HSs in patients with risk factors more likely to have rectal complications, such as non-conventional radiotherapy dose fractionations and high-risk disease.

Method and materials:

A literature search of peer-reviewed electronic articles was carried out using Boolean connectors and Medical Subject Headings in the databases. Databases searched included ScienceDirect, Medline and Cinahl. The articles were assessed using relevant critical appraisal skills programme tools.

Results:

From the 26 studies used, HS showed a clinically significant relative reduction in rectal planning dose volumes for both high- and low-risk prostate cancer patients in a range of radiotherapy treatment modalities including volumetric modulated arc therapy, intensity-modulated radiotherapy, intensity-modulated proton therapy, stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy and brachytherapy. Spacer placements were successfully inserted in 99% of patients. However, rectal wall infiltration occurrence was 6% and ≥2 cm unsymmetrical placements in 2%.

Findings:

A spacer scoring system based on the HS symmetry has provided evidence of the quality of the position inserted, which was visually aided by T2-wieghted MRIs. Despite optimal HS placements ranging from 62 to 72%, HS had a clinically significant reduction of ≥25% in planned rectal V70 dose in 97% of patients.

Major Complications and Adverse Events Related to the Injection of the SpaceOAR Hydrogel System Before Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer: Review of the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database

Purpose: SpaceOAR^® is a Food and Drug Administration-approved hydrogel injection used to create space between the prostate and rectum during prostate radiotherapy. It has shown to significantly reduce the rectal radiation dose with lower rates of rectal toxicity. Despite a high safety performance in initial trials, SpaceOAR remains in early clinical use. Thus, we examined emerging safety reports as the system becomes more widely utilized. Methods: We reviewed the SpaceOAR manufacturer website for the safety profile and complications associated with the SpaceOAR hydrogel. We then compared this with reports submitted to the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database. Results: The manufacturer website reported risks including pain, needle penetration, and/or gel injection into a nearby organ or blood vessel, local inflammation, infection, urinary retention, and local rectal injury or symptoms. There were 22 unique reports discussing 25 patient cases in the MAUDE database from January 2015 to March 2019, with an increasing number of reports each year up through 2018. Unique major complications including acute pulmonary embolism, severe anaphylaxis, prostatic abscess and sepsis, purulent perineal drainage, rectal wall erosion, and rectourethral fistula were reported. Conclusion: Despite well-documented clinical benefits of the SpaceOAR System, there are a number of severe and debilitating complications recently reported in proximity to gel injection. This highlights the need for further study of device complications in light of its increasing clinical use.

Late toxicities of prostate cancer radiotherapy with and without hydrogel SpaceAOR insertion

INTRODUCTION

To investigate whether the implantation of a hydrogel spacer (SpaceOAR) reduces long-term rectal toxicity for prostate cancer patients treated with intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT).

METHODS

Patients with localised prostate cancer treated with 81 Gy in 45 fx of IMRT over 9 weeks were retrospectively compared: 65 patients with SpaceOAR and 56 patients without SpaceOAR. Planning aims restricted rectal doses to V40 Gy < 35%, V65 Gy < 17%, V75 Gy < 10%. Toxicities were evaluated between 3 months and 3 years after the completion of radiotherapy and were based on the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) assessment tool for diarrhoea, haemorrhoids, faecal incontinence and proctitis.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea (G1) was significantly higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (21.4% vs 6.2%; P = 0.016). The cumulative incidence of proctitis (grades G1 and G2) was also higher in the non-SpaceOAR group (26.7% vs 9.2%; P = 0.015); the cumulative incidence of G2 proctitis was higher in the latter group (P = 0.043). There were no differences between the treatment groups for cumulative incidences of faecal incontinence and/or haemorrhoids. Three years after IMRT, diarrhoea and proctitis were higher in the non-SpaceOAR group, without reaching statistical significance. This finding was unchanged after correcting for baseline symptoms.

CONCLUSION

SpaceOAR is of benefit in reducing the cumulative incidence of low-grade diarrhoea and proctitis for up to 3 years after intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Assessment of Polyethylene Glycol Hydrogel Spacer and Its Effect on Rectal Radiation Dose in Prostate Cancer Patients Receiving Proton Beam Radiation Therapy

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of placing a polyethylene glycol (PEG) spacing hydrogel in patients undergoing proton beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. This study also aims to assess the effect on rectal radiation dose of prostate-rectum separation in various anatomic planes.

Methods and Materials

Seventy-two consecutive prostate cancer patients undergoing conventionally fractionated pencil beam scanning proton radiation therapy with and without hydrogel placement were compared. Magnetic resonance images taken after hydrogel placement measured prostate-rectum separation and were correlated to rectal dosing and rectal toxicity. Univariate analysis of clinical variables and radiation dosing was conducted using nonparametric Wilcoxon rank-sum test with continuity correction between groups (hydrogel spacer vs controls). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient assessed relationships between the various anatomic dimensions of perirectal space and rectal radiation dosing.

Results

Fifty-one patients had hydrogel placement before therapy and 21 did not. There was a 42.2% reduction in rectal dosing (mL³ rectum) in hydrogel patients (P < .001). Increasing midline sagittal lift resulted in a greater mitigation of total rectal dose (P = .031). The degree of prostate surface area coverage on coronal plane did not correlate with further reductions in rectal radiation dose (P = .673). Patients who had PEG hydrogels placed reported more rectal side effects during treatment compared with those patients who did not (35.3% vs 9.5%, P = .061). At median 9.5-month follow-up, there was no difference in reporting of grade ≤2 rectal toxicity between the 2 groups (7.7% vs 7.1%, P = .145).

Conclusions

Polyethylene glycol hydrogel placement before pencil proton beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer reduced rectal radiation dose. The most important factor reducing total rectal dose was the degree of sagittal midline separation created by the PEG hydrogel. This is the largest study with the longest follow-up to investigate hydrogel placement in the proton beam radiation setting.

Maximizing rectal dose sparing with hydrogel: A retrospective planning study

External beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer can result in urinary, sexual, and rectal side effects, often impairing quality of life. A polyethylene glycol‐based product, SpaceOAR© hydrogel (SOH), implanted into the connective tissue between the prostate gland and rectum can significantly reduce the dose received by the rectum and hence risk of rectal toxicity. The optimal way to manage the hydrogel and rectal structures for plan optimization is therefore of interest. In 13 patients, computerized tomography (CT) scans were taken pre‐ and post‐SpaceOAR© implant. A prescription of 60 Gy in 20 fractions was planned on both scans. Six treatment plans were produced per anonymized dataset using either a structure of rectum plus the hydrogel, termed composite rectum wall (CRW), or rectal wall (RW) as an inverse optimization structure and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) as a treatment technique. Dose‐volume histogram metrics were compared between plans to determine which optimization structure and treatment technique offered the maximum rectal dose sparing. RW structures offered a statistically significant decrease in rectal dose over CRW structures, whereas the treatment technique (IMRT vs VMAT) did not significantly affect the rectal dose. There was improvement seen in bladder and penile bulb dose when VMAT was used as a treatment technique. Overall, treatment plans using the RW optimization structure offered the lowest rectal dose while VMAT treatment technique offered the lowest bladder and penile bulb dose.

Prospective analysis of hydrogel spacer for patients with prostate cancer undergoing radiotherapy

OBJECTIVE

To report on the dosimetric benefits and late toxicity outcomes after injection of hydrogel spacer (HS) between the prostate and rectum for patients treated with prostate radiotherapy (RT).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 76 patients with a clinical stage of T1-T3a prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion plus injection of the HS into the perirectal space before intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc RT (VMAT). HS safety, dosimetric benefits, and the immediate- to long-term effects of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity were assessed.

RESULTS

There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (range) prostate size was 66.0 (25.0-187.0) mm. Rectal dose volume parameters were observed and the volume of rectum receiving 70 Gy (rV₇₀ ), 75 Gy (rV₇₅ ) and 78 Gy (rV₇₈ ) was 7.8%, 3.6% and 0.4%, respectively. In all, 21% of patients (16/76) developed acute Grade 1 GI toxicities, but all were resolved completely by 3 months after treatment; whilst, 3% of patients (2/76) developed late Grade 1 GI toxicities. No patients had acute or late Grade ≥2 GI toxicities.

CONCLUSION

Injection of HS resulted in a reduction of irradiated rectal dose volumes along with minimal GI toxicities, irrespective of prostate size.

Absorbable Hydrogel Spacer Use in Prostate Radiotherapy: A Comprehensive Review of Phase 3 Clinical Trial Published Data

OBJECTIVE

To provide an update on SpaceOAR System, a Food and Drug Administration-approved hydrogel indicated to create distance between the prostate and the rectum which has been studied in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. Here, we review and summarize these clinical results including the safety of prostate-rectum spacer application technique, the implant quality and resulting rectal dose reduction, acute and long-term rectal, urinary, and sexual toxicity, as well as patient-reported outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective, randomized patient-blinded clinical study was performed comparing image-guided intensity modulated prostate radiotherapy (79.2 Gy in 44 fractions) in men with or without prostate-rectum hydrogel spacer. Patients were followed up for 3 years, allowing assessment of long-term safety and efficacy.

RESULTS

Spacer application was well tolerated with a 99% technical success rate. The mean additional space created between the prostate and the rectum was just over 1 cm, which allowed significant rectum and penile bulb radiation dose reduction, resulting in less acute pain, lower rates of late rectal toxicity, and improved bowel and urinary quality of life (QOL) scores from 6 months onward. Improvements in sexual QOL were also observed at 37 months in baseline-potent men, with 37.5% of control and 66.7% of spacer men capable of "erections sufficient for intercourse."

CONCLUSION

Prostate-rectum hydrogel spacer application is a relatively safe technical procedure that is well tolerated and has a high technical success rate. Spacer application significantly reduces rectal radiation dose and results in long-term reductions in rectal toxicity, as well as improvements in bowel, urinary, and sexual QOL.